This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Originally Posted by Dickieboy

True enough but I don’t feel three years equates to ~30 in the public/private sector.

I actually think private sector experience isn't very useful. It's kind of like me saying I think I'd be a really good violin player because I spent years programming computers. I half agree about governor experience being better than legislator experience, but Romney has 4 years as governor, Obama has 4 as president, so president is clearly the more valuable experience. Historically, second term presidents have radically outperformed first term ones (including their own first terms). So, we're left weighing years of corporate raiding against being a senator and a lawyer and a professor. Lets say that's a wash (which I think is being generous to Romney). What we're left with is just presidential experience vs gubernatorial experience.

Originally Posted by Dickieboy

What does bother me about the President is his failure to find some way to ‘lead’. It is often espoused that those on the right (especially the TPers) will absolutely not yield but a good leader finds a way to make it happen. Reagan and O’Neil did, Clinton and Gingrich did (and I can think of no greater obnoxiously abstentious ‘righie’). Why can’t this President do it? I consider it his job. I believe there was little executive ‘experience’ attained in the first two years as his party held congress and no compromise was necessary.

So you're voting against Obama because the tea party refuse to compromise? They explicitly declared that they intended to block everythign they could to make Obama look bad. You're willingly letting that work on you? Doesn't that just give both parties an incentive to refuse to compromise on anything if people vote against the opposite side when they do?

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Originally Posted by teamosil

I actually think private sector experience isn't very useful. It's kind of like me saying I think I'd be a really good violin player because I spent years programming computers. I half agree about governor experience being better than legislator experience, but Romney has 4 years as governor, Obama has 4 as president, so president is clearly the more valuable experience. Historically, second term presidents have radically outperformed first term ones (including their own first terms). So, we're left weighing years of corporate raiding against being a senator and a lawyer and a professor. Lets say that's a wash (which I think is being generous to Romney). What we're left with is just presidential experience vs gubernatorial experience.

So you're voting against Obama because the tea party refuse to compromise? They explicitly declared that they intended to block everythign they could to make Obama look bad. You're willingly letting that work on you? Doesn't that just give both parties an incentive to refuse to compromise on anything if people vote against the opposite side when they do?

So youre saying that a guy with decades in the private sector, a turn around of a multibillion dollar enterprise in the Olympic games, having to turn around a gigantic deficit in Mass., knows how the private sector works inside and out is only on par with Obama? Sorry that doesnt wash. Obama's inexperience in the private sector shows in how he approaches problems and how he looks for solutions, he believes the government is the solution every time. Thats why he needs to go.

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Originally Posted by teamosil

So you're voting against Obama because the tea party refuse to compromise? They explicitly declared that they intended to block everythign they could to make Obama look bad. You're willingly letting that work on you? Doesn't that just give both parties an incentive to refuse to compromise on anything if people vote against the opposite side when they do?

No but this thread is not the place to discuss why I am voting against President Obama. As to the 'block everything' it is common for the minority party to exhibit this, nothing new. Same as the 'one term president' comment. I mean really is it so appalling to think that whichever party is NOT in power has a goal to get back IN POWER?

Work on me? No, again I believe a leader’s job is to lead. A good one finds a way to build bridges rather than blame. Accepting ‘they intend on blocking everything’ is a cop out and not leadership.

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Originally Posted by Dickieboy

No but this thread is not the place to discuss why I am voting against President Obama. As to the 'block everything' it is common for the minority party to exhibit this, nothing new. Same as the 'one term president' comment. I mean really is it so appalling to think that whichever party is NOT in power has a goal to get back IN POWER?

Work on me? No, again I believe a leader’s job is to lead. A good one finds a way to build bridges rather than blame. Accepting ‘they intend on blocking everything’ is a cop out and not leadership.

You are just refusing to acknowledge reality. There is nothing common about the obstructionism exhibited by the Republicans in Congress. Republicans in the Senate have shattered previous records for filibusters. It is the kiss of death for a Republican legislator to be labeled as someone who might, on occasion, work with Democrats to get something done. Just ask Dick Lugar. Remember what his Tea Party opponent had to say? ￼⁠”I certainly think bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view."

"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Originally Posted by OpportunityCost

So youre saying that a guy with decades in the private sector, a turn around of a multibillion dollar enterprise in the Olympic games, having to turn around a gigantic deficit in Mass., knows how the private sector works inside and out is only on par with Obama? Sorry that doesnt wash. Obama's inexperience in the private sector shows in how he approaches problems and how he looks for solutions, he believes the government is the solution every time. Thats why he needs to go.

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Originally Posted by teamosil

I actually think private sector experience isn't very useful. It's kind of like me saying I think I'd be a really good violin player because I spent years programming computers. I half agree about governor experience being better than legislator experience, but Romney has 4 years as governor, Obama has 4 as president, so president is clearly the more valuable experience.

I think dealing with a financial implosion , job loss implosion and a couple of wars to boot like recently happened is a monumentious task that goes far and beyond the call of duty.

Historically, second term presidents have radically outperformed first term ones (including their own first terms).

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Originally Posted by OpportunityCost

So youre saying that a guy with decades in the private sector, a turn around of a multibillion dollar enterprise in the Olympic games, having to turn around a gigantic deficit in Mass., knows how the private sector works inside and out is only on par with Obama?

No, I am saying that Obama has dramatically more relevant experience for the job. Being president for 4 years easily outweighs all the experience Romney has.

But, even if we ignore his experience as president and Romney's experience as governor, Obama still beats Romney IMO. Being a law professor, for example, is far, far, harder, more relevant, work than chopping up companies and parting them out for profit. On top of that, he was a state senator and a US senator.

But, with the presidential experience in the equation, it isn't really even close.

Originally Posted by OpportunityCost

Get the memo Teamo, its not corporate raiding its equity investment

What do you see as the difference between the two other than one sounds nice and the other doesn't? Equity investor is a broader category. It includes both hostile and friendly investment. Bain mostly did hostile takeovers. It includes both investment firms that seek to build up the company they invest in long term, and firms that seek to part out or slash and flip companies they buy. Bain was the later. What about what they do is it that you think doesn't fit in the "corporate raider" heading?

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Originally Posted by Dickieboy

No but this thread is not the place to discuss why I am voting against President Obama. As to the 'block everything' it is common for the minority party to exhibit this, nothing new. Same as the 'one term president' comment. I mean really is it so appalling to think that whichever party is NOT in power has a goal to get back IN POWER?

Work on me? No, again I believe a leader’s job is to lead. A good one finds a way to build bridges rather than blame. Accepting ‘they intend on blocking everything’ is a cop out and not leadership.

Well, so you are saying that yes, that tactic does work on you. If one party refuses to compromise, you will blame the other party. No?

Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives-Part 2

Originally Posted by Dickieboy

Why did you feel the need to go personal?

There's nothing personal about it. Why so butthurt?

"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."